Rofl
Question Three is stupid!
IF Donald wins there will be no gun laws
if lyin scum bag clinton wins there will be no guns
I still think that the ‘rats need to close The Gun Burglary Loophole used so frequently by their peeps.
My my my, what an interesting list of people who are not legally allowed to protect their own lives.
Boy!
Now that is a well defined sub-group.
Who determines who these "dangerous people" are and what exactly makes them "dangerous people"?
We would need no gun control whatsoever if we exercised common sense crime, and criminal, control. We baby these animals and then want to blame their tools of trade.
I live in Maine, and people have been selling guns here through private sales for at least 300 years.
Plus, Maine has one of the highest rates of firearm ownership in the country but at the same time one of the lowest crime rates.
What we DO have is out-of-state drug dealers.....mostly from New York City, Massachusetts and Connecticut.....coming to Maine and selling heroin here in the state of Maine. It’s causing a lot of problems with addiction and deaths as a result.
The police chiefs of Maine.....the useless dolts that they are....support so-called “universal background checks” and are doing TV and radio spots for the “Yes” vote.
The elected sheriffs of Maine are opposed to the “universal background checks”.....the end of private sales. They are appearing on television in ads, in uniform, with their names and positions on the screen in order to urge people to vote “No.”
The sheriff say that good people will wind up in jail, and they are worried that the next step will be registration, which won’t fly with anyone except ultra-moonbats.
Bloomberg is spending money on “Yes” ads; there haven’t been very many “No” ads. Where the hell is the NRA? They should be pounding the airwaves.
The Sportsmans Alliance of Maine said they will fight this measure in the Maine House and the Maine Senate if this crap passes.
The governor of Maine has said this measure would violate the Maine Constitution if passed.
Obama, as you know, created an offshore National Monument on the ocean floor.....1.5 million acres. It would ban lobster fishing in that area in seven years. Most lobster fisherman catch their lobster fairly close to shore, so while this is not good for the lobster guys, it is much worse for the guys who make their living catching fish. The ban on fishing takes place now. People are already up in arms about this. Thanks, Obama.
Newspapers should be known for posting news, not publicizing drivel and idiocy from the mind of a lawyer with political connections.
And, Maine lawyers should be known for upholding the Constitution, and not the rantings of liberal special interest groups, and communists.
And how many of these 5,500 people have been prosecuted?
” A loophole in Maine law allows dangerous people to buy guns from unlicensed sellers without a background check.”
Screw all of these people, I am so k of them. Bad people WILL get weapons, but that is not justification to infringe on the rights of others. What’s next, prior restraint on all free speech because SOME people incite violence or revolution?
Just a moonbat in a moonbat paper speaking moonbat....I do not need permission for a right. Everyone here knows that the areas with the strictest gun laws are the worst ...an armed society is a polite society....just a shame all the boating mishaps up here (I live in Maine) and everyone I know just happened to have ALL of their firearms with them....sad we meet regularly to console one another...Vote no on question 3.
Oh my! The deadly “loophole”.
It’s still a federal crime to sell a gun to a prohibited person, isn’t it?
Bullshit. There's no such thing as a "loophole" in the law. The law commands what it commands, forbids what it forbids. If the legislature wanted it differently, it would have passed a different law.
background checks
Where, in any State or Federal Constitution, is any legislative body authorized to impose "background checks" on purchasers of firearms (or anything else)? What part of "shall not be infringed" do you smacktards not comprehend?
Congress's military authority enumerated in the Constitution’s Section 8 of Article I aside, there is no clear constitutional delegation of power by the states for the feds to regulate civilian-use firearms. It is therefore very important to point out that a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that powers that the states have not expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds, the specific power to regulate civilian-use firearms in this example, are prohibited to the feds.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
In fact, regardless what FDR’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices wanted everybody to believe about the scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3), state sovereignty-respecting justices had also previously clarified that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific power to regulate INTRAstate commerce.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
So especially in this time of politically correct open borders, it remains that the feds have no express constitutional authority to make laws regulating the INTRAstate sales or use of civilian-use firearms imo.
So why are there federal laws that regulate civilian-use firearms?
It is disturbing that federal laws regulating civilian-use firearms don’t seem to have appeared in the books until the time of the FDR Administration, FDR and the Congress at the time infamous for making laws which Congress could not justify under its Section 8-limited powers.
Franklin Roosevelt: The Father of Gun Control
Remember in November !
Patriots need to support Trump / Pence by also electing a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to support Trump’s vision for making America great again for everybody, but will also put a stop to unconstitutonal federal taxes and likewise unconstitutional inteference in state affairs as evidenced by unconstitutional federal gun laws imo.
Note that such a Congress will also probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring, pro-gun control activist justices.